USPTO serial 78532240
C MATUBA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FINNEGAN, TIMOTHY
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with C MATUBA?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Cape Coastal Wines (Proprietary) Limited
Bellville, Western Cape, ZA
Other trademarks owned by Cape Coastal Wines (Proprietary) Limited
Cape Coastal Wines (Proprietary) Limited
Bellville, Western Cape, ZA
Other trademarks owned by Cape Coastal Wines (Proprietary) Limited
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lawrence E. Apolzon
LAWRENCE E APOLZON FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017-1822UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | wines | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
- Other trademarks owned by Cape Coastal Wines (Proprietary) Limited
- Other trademarks owned by Cape Coastal Wines (Proprietary) Limited
- Other trademarks in Class 033
- Similar marks named C MATUBA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14, 2007 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Dec 7, 2007 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Nov 7, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 7, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jul 18, 2006 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jun 1, 2006 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 2, 2006 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Dec 14, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 25, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 29, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Sep 29, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Sep 29, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 12, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Sep 9, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Aug 31, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 10, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 10, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 22, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Jul 22, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Jul 19, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 27, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |